Assume good intent. It's kind of a motto where I work. Others are surely familiar with it too. I'd also add that baseline levels of sanity, competence, etc. ar

Assume good intent. It's kind of a motto where I work. Others are surely familiar with it too. I'd also add that baseline levels of sanity, competence, etc. are all part of intent for the purposes of this admonition. It's a good rule, and the OP demonstrates exactly how things can go sideways when it's not followed. Maybe others didn't recognize the author's good intent, but he clearly didn't recognize theirs either. As far as I can tell, he doesn't think they ever did a single thing right until he came along, which is a huge red flag. I doubt he felt that way when he accepted the job (why would anyone?) so it reeks of post-hoc rationalization. Remember, we're only hearing one side of the story. Chances are, even if he was right on the major points, he has elided how his first ten "you just need to" proposals had to be amended in a collaborative process for which he denies anyone else any credit. Counting the hits, ignoring the misses. If he had assumed instead that other people weren't idiots, that they had reasons for what they'd done and would be amenable to reason, there might have been a better outcome. P.S. Yes, I know sometimes people really do lack good intent. Some people really are mean, stupid, crazy, etc. Believe me, I've worked with a few and I've called them out on it ... but only once there was incontrovertible evidence of those things. It doesn't change the fact that it's better to start by assuming good intent.